Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:46824 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 14753 invoked from network); 19 Jan 2010 18:36:49 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 19 Jan 2010 18:36:49 -0000 Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com smtp.mail=stas@zend.com; spf=pass; sender-id=pass Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com header.from=stas@zend.com; sender-id=pass Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain zend.com designates 212.25.124.185 as permitted sender) X-PHP-List-Original-Sender: stas@zend.com X-Host-Fingerprint: 212.25.124.185 il-mr1.zend.com Received: from [212.25.124.185] ([212.25.124.185:39495] helo=il-mr1.zend.com) by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP id D5/91-29385-EBBF55B4 for ; Tue, 19 Jan 2010 13:36:48 -0500 Received: from us-gw1.zend.com (unknown [192.168.16.5]) by il-mr1.zend.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 96BD350444; Tue, 19 Jan 2010 20:20:27 +0200 (IST) Received: from [192.168.16.93] ([192.168.16.93]) by us-gw1.zend.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Tue, 19 Jan 2010 10:36:41 -0800 Message-ID: <4B55FBBA.4030304@zend.com> Date: Tue, 19 Jan 2010 10:36:42 -0800 Organization: Zend Technologies User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.9.1.5) Gecko/20091204 Lightning/1.0b2pre Thunderbird/3.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Lukas Kahwe Smith CC: Chris Stockton , PHP Internals References: <4B54FC87.8070106@zend.com> <0932AFD3-59EF-4A69-BFBF-25C899B6369D@pooteeweet.org> In-Reply-To: <0932AFD3-59EF-4A69-BFBF-25C899B6369D@pooteeweet.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-OriginalArrivalTime: 19 Jan 2010 18:36:41.0452 (UTC) FILETIME=[57D7BAC0:01CA9936] Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] function call chaining From: stas@zend.com (Stanislav Malyshev) Hi! > enhancements in the sense that they enable things that were not > possible before, sure. syntax sugar that hurts readability, not > really. It starts to seem to me that the notion of readability is rather different here than in the rest of the world. Lately, almost any syntax sugar features - including ones present and popular in many other languages - are consistently rejected because they "hurt readability". I'm starting to feel there's a confusion (or erroneous identification) between readability and verbosity - which is IMHO not good. We have features like foo()->bar() that reduce verbosity and I think by now everyone agrees they are a good idea. So I think it is worth to reconsider the notion that reducing verbosity hurts readability. -- Stanislav Malyshev, Zend Software Architect stas@zend.com http://www.zend.com/ (408)253-8829 MSN: stas@zend.com